This article presents an examination of the parallelism between the Mishnah and Tosefta in one discourse unit – the halakhic give-and-take conversation. It aims to show that a description of discourse units found in both compilations can contribute to the discussion of the relationship between the two compilations and the status of the Tosefta in regard to Mishnah. In the examined corpus of halakhic give-and-take conversations from the Mishnah and Tosefta from three orders, for only 16 conversations in the Tosefta (14%) was there found a parallel conversation in the Mishnah, and in most cases the parallels are not identical. The structural and linguistic comparison between these 16 parallel conversations showed that the conversations in the Tosefta contain more exchanges as well as more complete exchanges, and that the language in the Tosefta seems less redacted and earlier compared with the language in the parallel conversations in the Mishnah.

Chapters 10–15 in Tosefta Soṭah contain the longest, most elaborated aggadic unit in the Tosefta. It comprises various units that seem to be connected only loosely: the biblical righteous figures who brought abundance to the world (chs. 10–12); various revelations and appearances of the holy spirit and divine echo (ch. 13); and the effects of the destruction and the calamities of the present (chs. 14–15). In this article I argue that it forms in fact a coherent unit. It combines apocalyptic, priestly, and wisdom themes in a manner that is unprecedented in rabbinic literature, but is similar to several Second Temple texts. It tells a tale of perpetual decline from the biblical golden age to the rabbis’ own age of destruction, together with its eschatological remedy. It combines priestly and apocalyptic themes to form an alternative to the standard rabbinic meta-narrative of the transfer from prophecy to Torah. The first section of the article discusses chapters 10–13 and reconstructs their meticulous similarity with, and influence by, Ben Sira; the second section compares the complete composite unit (chs. 10–15) to the parallel Mishnah; and the third section examines the apocalyptic themes found in our text. I end with the need to reevaluate the relationship between rabbinic literature and apocalypticism.

This article describes the argumentative steps in the halakhic give-and-take conversations in the Mishnah and Tosefta, which are two compilations written in Tannaitic language, the language that had been used in the first period of Mishnaic Hebrew. The argumentative steps in the conversations are examined, i.e., the connection between the arguments of the sages when they present their views in the conversations.

The analysis of argumentative steps in halakhic give-and-take conversations in the Mishnah and Tosefta is based on the model proposed by Muntigl and Turnbull (1998). This model has classified the four types of disagreement acts, which were found in naturally occurring conversations: counterclaim, contradiction, challenge and irrelevancy claim; and it also ranks the degree of aggressiveness of the acts. The study conducted by Blondheim and Blum-Kulka (2001) on a Talmudic text was also based on Muntigl and Turnbull's study.

The aim of this article is to try to assess the degree of aggressiveness of the halakhic give-and-take conversations in the Mishnah and Tosefta by means of an examination of the types of argumentative steps. The findings from these two compilations are compared to the findings of the two previous studies.